Having edited numerous football images over the years, I have yet to experience a World Cup match in person. The chance to capture such historic moments from the sidelines is something I greatly admire. Nevertheless, this tournament has demonstrated that one can create compelling visuals that encapsulate the competition’s essence without being physically present.
Slit-scanning is a fascinating photographic technique I first experimented with years ago. This method employs a narrow slit in an analog camera, allowing photographers to move a film roll past the aperture, thus capturing motion over time. While it is a labor-intensive and intricate process, it results in uniquely distorted images that celebrate the peculiarities of the “I don’t have an accreditation, but I do have my TV and my own vision.” effect, a phenomenon that has intrigued photographers for ages.
Alternatively, a simpler method to achieve a similar warping effect involves using printed photographs along with a digital flat-bed scanner, as illustrated in this gallery.
Interestingly, the practice of scanning has connections to sports photography that date back to at least the late 1930s. The Hollywood engineer Lorenzo Del Riccio developed the “circular flow camera,” used by the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club in the U.S. This camera was designed to capture the speed of horse races, recording the motion of any body part moving either faster or slower than the average pace, ultimately revealing the winner of the race.
Two decades later, renowned photographer George Silk from Life magazine applied slit-scanning during the Olympic trials in 1960, providing a dynamic depiction of athletes in action. His vibrant images of shot-putters and sprinters conveyed an impressionistic take on sports.
This World Cup has seen a rise in photographers exploring unconventional methods to capture the event. Florence Pernet gained notable recognition for her stunning images taken by photographing her television screen, which went viral after being shared by French footballer Michael Olise. Pernet expressed, “I don’t have an accreditation, but I do have my TV and my own vision.”
Photographers for major global agencies are also increasingly encouraged to innovate. This shift has led to the use of vintage cameras, infrared imaging, and prismatic filters in conjunction with high-end mirrorless cameras and telephoto lenses. For example, Getty’s Shaun Botterill has recently returned to the same film stock he utilized while covering the World Cup in Mexico in 1986.
Through my experimentation with the flat-bed scanner, I found that various types of images respond differently to motion. For Harry Kane’s celebration, my approach was jagged and spontaneous, whereas later scans, such as those of Kylian Mbappé, were intentional and meticulously planned.
Some might question the choice to distort reality or to embrace imperfections. After all, it was not too long ago that photographers aimed to achieve 30 crisp frames per second with eye-controlled autofocus. Why disregard technological advancements and the standards of journalistic integrity? The answer lies in photography’s dual role as both an art form and a documentary tool. It is inherently adaptable and subjective, free from rigid rules governing its practice.
I recognize that the images I’ve altered required considerable skill and creativity to produce — they were remarkable in their own right, which is exactly why I selected them. Yet, there is something invigorating about experimenting with photography and perceiving the World Cup from a different perspective, even from 3,000 miles away.
